"But today's most serious threats comes not from those who would persecute us, but from those who would, without any malice, kill us with kindness - by assimilating us, marrying us, and merging with us out of respect, admiration and even love." -- The Vanishing American Jew
Prof. Dershowitz, in his book The Vanishing American Jew (1997), postulates that the Jews of America may be entering, what he terms, a "golden age", where Jews will be able to prove once and for all that Jews don't need enemies to survive.
Dershowitz argues that for too long, Jews have identified themselves through their constant victimization and persecution. He calls this the "Tzuris Theory", whereby the Jews are in need of, and at times prefer, external troubles to prosperity, in order for them to be able to remain Jewish. When Jews are persecuted, it sharpens their sense of community and Jewish identity: "If Jewish life cannot thrive in an open environment of opportunity, choice, freethinking, affluence, success and first class status. then Jewish life as we know it will not, and should not, survive the first half of the twenty-first century."
Dershowitz states that the key to Jewish continuity is for the Jews to "become positively Jewish instead of merely reacting to our enemies. To the contrary: We can thrive best in an open society where we freely choose to be Jews because of the positive virtues of our 3,500-year-old civilization." What is needed is to create a new "Jewish state of mind".
I must agree with Prof. Dershowitz in his assessment that for too long have the Jewish people been held together through the cruelty of their enemies, who at every opportunity, reminded them that they were Jews and that they didn't belong. In Napoleon's France, with the Enlightenment having been ushered in, the Jews believed that they would finally be viewed as equals. Yet, that was not meant to be, as ultimately, even with the Jews desire to go as far as twisting their millennia old principles of faith in order to be viewed as equals, as was the case in the Napoleonic Sanhedrin, the Jews still were viewed as outsiders, and woke up to the reality that the Emancipation didn't apply to them. Even in Western Europe, the Jew came to know well the inside face of the ghetto walls, and in Eastern Europe, the Jewish experience could be briefly described through reference to the Pale of Settlement, pogroms and persecution.
The Jews, in order to gain acceptance to greater European society, were willing to redefine themselves and their Jewish identity, and both the Eastern and Western Europeans came up with their own ways of doing this. Whether it was the advent of Reform Judaism, the "Sense of Mission", the Haskalah, or the Bund, the Jew has, throughout his history, shown a willingness to alter his faith in order to be accepted by the non-Jews.
Up until the advent of Zionism, the Jew could be defined either through the differences between himself and greater society, and the consequences of these differences, or through the extent he was willing to go to in order to eliminate those differences in order to gain acceptance to society. When Theodor Herzl arrived on the scene, all of that began to change.
Prof. Dershowitz states that Zionism, as Herzl envisioned it, was born as a result of anti-Semitism. While this may be true to a degree, it doesn't do justice to the sense of Jewish identity and pride that swept through the Jewish people when Zionism arrived on the scene. Not to mention that it was Zionism that led to a discussion and debate over the very idea of positive Judaism that Prof. Dershowitz is so much in favor of.
What should be the character of this Jewish national home/Jewish State? Should it be a cultural/spiritual center, as Ahad Ha'am sought? Perhaps a state based on socialist principles as Berdychevski and Brenner believed? One where the Jew is connected with the land and nature, in the footsteps of A. D. Gordon? Maybe one that would serve to bring about the redemption of the Jewish people, in a religious sense, as that of Rabbi Kook, or in a secular sense, as that of Ben-Gurion? Perhaps one where the ancient Hebrew language would be brought to life, as Ben Yehudah was able to accomplish? What role should Judaism play in the State? Was this return of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland to be viewed as the "first flowerings of redemption" or as an opportunity to be the last Jews and the first Hebrews?
All of these questions, in a way, revolved around the positive Judaism that Dershowitz is talking about. The questions that these Zionist figures were debating were not questions revolving around anti-Semitism or how to best fit in with the non-Jews (although they may have also been considerations); rather, they revolved around how to create the ideal Jew and the ideal Jewish society.
Dershowitz himself offers no insight as to what the positive Judaism that should be taught and lived is. He does mention the great heights to which Jews have reached in the recent past. Whether having numerous cabinet members in Bill Clinton's administration, having Supreme Court Justices, a disproportionate number of Nobel Prize recipients, being amongst the wealthiest in America, and Jews being able to live virtually anywhere they want.
Yet, this cannot possibly be the positive Judaism to which Prof. Dershowitz alludes, for one need not be Jewish to achieve these heights. As Prof. Dershowitz himself states, "They see no reason not to follow their heart in marriage, their convenience in neighborhoods, their economic opportunities in jobs, their educational advantages in schools, their conscience in philosophy, and their preference in lifestyle. Most Jews who assimilate do not feel they are giving up anything by abandoning a Jewishness they know little about."
As such, the question stands, what is this positive Judaism that Prof. Dershowitz believes will keep these individuals from living the American dream out to the fullest? What are these principles of "education, scholarship, creativity, justice and compassion" that Prof. Dershowitz speaks of?
Thankfully, Prof. Dershowitz need not be in a hurry to define his positive Judaism, as the golden age that was on the doorstep was never ushered in. In 1997, life was good for the Jewish people, in particular for the Jews living in Israel and America. There was economic prosperity for all, and peace seemed to be just around the corner in Israel. The Jews, as Dershowitz stated, were going to now have to define themselves, not by their enemies, but through themselves. Alas, this never came to be. Today, anti-Semitism is not only found within the extreme elements of society, and anti-Israel and anti-Zionist sentiments are even more common, with the line between them becoming blurrier by the day. Anti-Semitism today can be found within universities, among professor and student alike. Anti-Semitic statements and opinions are now heard regularly in the international press, and the anti-Israel agenda within the United Nations speaks for itself.
Israel is at war, and as a result, the Jew in America is caught up in it, whether he chooses to be or not. Just as in the pre-state days of the Yishuv, one is either pro-Zionism (pro-Israel) or not, there are no neutral positions.
Perhaps Dershowitz would have been proved right, had things turned out differently. Yet, Prof. Dershowitz fails to grasp the centrality of Israel to the question of Jewish continuity and he fails to account for the unnaturalness of the Diaspora existence. History has shown time and again that Jewish life in the Diaspora in unsustainable. Either, in an effort to fit in with greater society, the Jew will cut out parts of his Jewish identity that are seen as barriers to his acceptance (as was the case of Reform Jewry, among other movements) or he will build up walls to isolate himself from the greater society, which is wholly unnatural.
Only in Israel can the Jew find the synthesis that would allow him to live a full Jewish life while at the same time being a full member of society. That is the very challenge being played out in Israel everyday, and it is the only place in the world where the Jewish people have any chance of living up to the challenge.
Dershowitz says that his book and viewpoint are different because he does not have any allegiances to a particular Jewish movement or organization, stating that, "I strongly believe that it is essential - both for Jews and for America - that the mainstream American Jewish community flourish." Therein lies his bias, a bias towards the viability of Jewish life in the Diaspora, even though Jewish history has shown otherwise. Dershowitz is not in favor of living in a ghetto, and sadly the type of free lifestyle Judaism that he seeks in America is not to be found, as is evident with the high intermarriage rates and below zero sum population growth that the latest population study revealed.
Dershowitz states that Aliyah cannot be the answer to the Jewish continuity question, simply because the majority of American Jews are not willing to make Aliyah. He states, correctly, that the majority of Jews who have made Aliyah in Israel's history have done so because they were running away from something, rather than running to something. Yet, what sets those Jews apart from the Jews in America was that they ultimately saw that there was no future for them in the Diaspora and picked themselves up and moved to Israel, where they could live as Jews, both in the home and in the street.
Should America continue to kill the Jewish community through kindness, the Jews there will go quietly to their end, rather than taking hold of the one life preserver that could have saved them. Should that come about, ironically enough, Prof. Dershowitz will have been proved to be correct in one regard. The Jews of America will have transcended their being defined through their enemies and will only have themselves to blame for their inability to survive as Jews in the modern world.
Prof. Dershowitz, in his book The Vanishing American Jew (1997), postulates that the Jews of America may be entering, what he terms, a "golden age", where Jews will be able to prove once and for all that Jews don't need enemies to survive.
Dershowitz argues that for too long, Jews have identified themselves through their constant victimization and persecution. He calls this the "Tzuris Theory", whereby the Jews are in need of, and at times prefer, external troubles to prosperity, in order for them to be able to remain Jewish. When Jews are persecuted, it sharpens their sense of community and Jewish identity: "If Jewish life cannot thrive in an open environment of opportunity, choice, freethinking, affluence, success and first class status. then Jewish life as we know it will not, and should not, survive the first half of the twenty-first century."
Dershowitz states that the key to Jewish continuity is for the Jews to "become positively Jewish instead of merely reacting to our enemies. To the contrary: We can thrive best in an open society where we freely choose to be Jews because of the positive virtues of our 3,500-year-old civilization." What is needed is to create a new "Jewish state of mind".
I must agree with Prof. Dershowitz in his assessment that for too long have the Jewish people been held together through the cruelty of their enemies, who at every opportunity, reminded them that they were Jews and that they didn't belong. In Napoleon's France, with the Enlightenment having been ushered in, the Jews believed that they would finally be viewed as equals. Yet, that was not meant to be, as ultimately, even with the Jews desire to go as far as twisting their millennia old principles of faith in order to be viewed as equals, as was the case in the Napoleonic Sanhedrin, the Jews still were viewed as outsiders, and woke up to the reality that the Emancipation didn't apply to them. Even in Western Europe, the Jew came to know well the inside face of the ghetto walls, and in Eastern Europe, the Jewish experience could be briefly described through reference to the Pale of Settlement, pogroms and persecution.
The Jews, in order to gain acceptance to greater European society, were willing to redefine themselves and their Jewish identity, and both the Eastern and Western Europeans came up with their own ways of doing this. Whether it was the advent of Reform Judaism, the "Sense of Mission", the Haskalah, or the Bund, the Jew has, throughout his history, shown a willingness to alter his faith in order to be accepted by the non-Jews.
Up until the advent of Zionism, the Jew could be defined either through the differences between himself and greater society, and the consequences of these differences, or through the extent he was willing to go to in order to eliminate those differences in order to gain acceptance to society. When Theodor Herzl arrived on the scene, all of that began to change.
Prof. Dershowitz states that Zionism, as Herzl envisioned it, was born as a result of anti-Semitism. While this may be true to a degree, it doesn't do justice to the sense of Jewish identity and pride that swept through the Jewish people when Zionism arrived on the scene. Not to mention that it was Zionism that led to a discussion and debate over the very idea of positive Judaism that Prof. Dershowitz is so much in favor of.
What should be the character of this Jewish national home/Jewish State? Should it be a cultural/spiritual center, as Ahad Ha'am sought? Perhaps a state based on socialist principles as Berdychevski and Brenner believed? One where the Jew is connected with the land and nature, in the footsteps of A. D. Gordon? Maybe one that would serve to bring about the redemption of the Jewish people, in a religious sense, as that of Rabbi Kook, or in a secular sense, as that of Ben-Gurion? Perhaps one where the ancient Hebrew language would be brought to life, as Ben Yehudah was able to accomplish? What role should Judaism play in the State? Was this return of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland to be viewed as the "first flowerings of redemption" or as an opportunity to be the last Jews and the first Hebrews?
All of these questions, in a way, revolved around the positive Judaism that Dershowitz is talking about. The questions that these Zionist figures were debating were not questions revolving around anti-Semitism or how to best fit in with the non-Jews (although they may have also been considerations); rather, they revolved around how to create the ideal Jew and the ideal Jewish society.
Dershowitz himself offers no insight as to what the positive Judaism that should be taught and lived is. He does mention the great heights to which Jews have reached in the recent past. Whether having numerous cabinet members in Bill Clinton's administration, having Supreme Court Justices, a disproportionate number of Nobel Prize recipients, being amongst the wealthiest in America, and Jews being able to live virtually anywhere they want.
Yet, this cannot possibly be the positive Judaism to which Prof. Dershowitz alludes, for one need not be Jewish to achieve these heights. As Prof. Dershowitz himself states, "They see no reason not to follow their heart in marriage, their convenience in neighborhoods, their economic opportunities in jobs, their educational advantages in schools, their conscience in philosophy, and their preference in lifestyle. Most Jews who assimilate do not feel they are giving up anything by abandoning a Jewishness they know little about."
As such, the question stands, what is this positive Judaism that Prof. Dershowitz believes will keep these individuals from living the American dream out to the fullest? What are these principles of "education, scholarship, creativity, justice and compassion" that Prof. Dershowitz speaks of?
Thankfully, Prof. Dershowitz need not be in a hurry to define his positive Judaism, as the golden age that was on the doorstep was never ushered in. In 1997, life was good for the Jewish people, in particular for the Jews living in Israel and America. There was economic prosperity for all, and peace seemed to be just around the corner in Israel. The Jews, as Dershowitz stated, were going to now have to define themselves, not by their enemies, but through themselves. Alas, this never came to be. Today, anti-Semitism is not only found within the extreme elements of society, and anti-Israel and anti-Zionist sentiments are even more common, with the line between them becoming blurrier by the day. Anti-Semitism today can be found within universities, among professor and student alike. Anti-Semitic statements and opinions are now heard regularly in the international press, and the anti-Israel agenda within the United Nations speaks for itself.
Israel is at war, and as a result, the Jew in America is caught up in it, whether he chooses to be or not. Just as in the pre-state days of the Yishuv, one is either pro-Zionism (pro-Israel) or not, there are no neutral positions.
Perhaps Dershowitz would have been proved right, had things turned out differently. Yet, Prof. Dershowitz fails to grasp the centrality of Israel to the question of Jewish continuity and he fails to account for the unnaturalness of the Diaspora existence. History has shown time and again that Jewish life in the Diaspora in unsustainable. Either, in an effort to fit in with greater society, the Jew will cut out parts of his Jewish identity that are seen as barriers to his acceptance (as was the case of Reform Jewry, among other movements) or he will build up walls to isolate himself from the greater society, which is wholly unnatural.
Only in Israel can the Jew find the synthesis that would allow him to live a full Jewish life while at the same time being a full member of society. That is the very challenge being played out in Israel everyday, and it is the only place in the world where the Jewish people have any chance of living up to the challenge.
Dershowitz says that his book and viewpoint are different because he does not have any allegiances to a particular Jewish movement or organization, stating that, "I strongly believe that it is essential - both for Jews and for America - that the mainstream American Jewish community flourish." Therein lies his bias, a bias towards the viability of Jewish life in the Diaspora, even though Jewish history has shown otherwise. Dershowitz is not in favor of living in a ghetto, and sadly the type of free lifestyle Judaism that he seeks in America is not to be found, as is evident with the high intermarriage rates and below zero sum population growth that the latest population study revealed.
Dershowitz states that Aliyah cannot be the answer to the Jewish continuity question, simply because the majority of American Jews are not willing to make Aliyah. He states, correctly, that the majority of Jews who have made Aliyah in Israel's history have done so because they were running away from something, rather than running to something. Yet, what sets those Jews apart from the Jews in America was that they ultimately saw that there was no future for them in the Diaspora and picked themselves up and moved to Israel, where they could live as Jews, both in the home and in the street.
Should America continue to kill the Jewish community through kindness, the Jews there will go quietly to their end, rather than taking hold of the one life preserver that could have saved them. Should that come about, ironically enough, Prof. Dershowitz will have been proved to be correct in one regard. The Jews of America will have transcended their being defined through their enemies and will only have themselves to blame for their inability to survive as Jews in the modern world.